Is the Packer roster special?

[Harlan Huckleby]

I really don't think so. They are good. Rogers makes all the recievers better. There were plenty of pedestrian players in last year's super bowl.

Several NFL teams have as much talent.

I think the Packers have two edges:
1 Aaron Rodgers
2 great defensive and offensive coordinators

[hoosier]

On offense I don't disagree: take away Rodgers and you have a pretty ordinary group. There are some stars (Jennings, Sitton) and some potential stars (Finley) but who doesn't have those?

On defense I am less convinced by your argument. Matthews, Raji, Woodson and Williams are all at or near the top of the league at their respective positions. Collins is just short of that. In the cases of Matthews, Raji and Woodson, it is clearly superior talent/experience. With William and other emerging players (Shields) they seem to be doing an especially good job of player development. The days of Slowick and Shottenhemier are thankfully long gone! I will grant you one thing: take away Capers and the Packers aren't anywhere near the SB last year.

[sharpe1027]

There are plenty of pedestrian players on any team. Also, with all the injuries, some of those pedestrian players were 2nd, 3rd or even 4th stringers.

That being said, I have never done a side-by-side comparison to of rosters from other teams, so your premise still might be valid.

[Fritz]

Everybody's special! Didn't your first grade teacher tell you that???

[vince]

I really don't think so. They are good. Rogers makes all the recievers better. There were plenty of pedestrian players in last year's super bowl.

Several NFL teams have as much talent.

I think the Packers have two edges:
1 Aaron Rodgers
2 great defensive and offensive coordinators

I tend to agree with this, but when you look around the league, I'm not having a lot of luck finding those several teams, particularly when you look at the vital positions of QB, pass rusher, and defensive backfield. And now the o-line looks like it could be right up there pretty much across the line except obviously for LG at this point. Throw in Raji, Jennings, Finley, I'm at a loss trying to find those teams. I come up with the Pats and that's about it. If you want to look historically, the job obviously gets easier...

[sheepshead]

Special? What in the world does that mean?

[HarveyWallbangers]

It's not special but it is super. Well, it was last year and I think we should be better. That doesn't always translate to wins and losses. Need better health than last year though.

[vince]

Special? What in the world does that mean?

Look it up fer chrisssakes. Special as in distinguished, esteemed, unusual, extraordinary. In this case, top 2 or 3 in the league.

[sheepshead]

So probowlers?

[HarveyWallbangers]

I tend to agree with this, but when you look around the league, I'm not having a lot of luck finding those several teams, particularly when you look at the vital positions of QB, pass rusher, and defensive backfield. And now the o-line looks like it could be right up there pretty much across the line except obviously for LG at this point. Throw in Raji, Jennings, Finley, I'm at a loss trying to find those teams. I come up with the Pats and that's about it. If you want to look historically, the job obviously gets easier...

Agreed--although I think you could argue that the Eagles have similar playmakers on their team. I just trust Rodgers in a big game more than Vick.

Really. You could say similar things about the Steelers roster most years. They have some stars at key positons. Playmakers. Surrounded by guys that fill their roles well. You could say the same thing about the mid 90s Super Bowl teams. We were pretty pedestrian at OL, RB was okay, WR wasn't special, LBs weren't great. We had a great QB, great DL, and good secondary.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I come up with the Pats and that's about it. If you want to look historically, the job obviously gets easier...

pats, igles, saints, jets, steelers, others have as much talent

the packer secondary looks like all-world

the roster does look very strong, better than last year, but preseason often glows brightly before inevitable injuries roll in.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I think MM and Capers keep opponents off-balance. therelies the biggie

[vince]

So probowlers?

Pro-bowlers wouldn't be a great measuring stick IMO, but it'd be interesting to look at for starters. I'd say the best measuring stick would use the 3irty1 double-secret formula rating system.

[MadScientist]

A special team doesn't mean a team filled with stars at every position. A special team has at least a couple of difference makers on both sides of the ball (QB is a must) surrounded by solid role players, not fuck-ups, and lead by excellent coaches. This Packers team has all the makings of a special team. Barring key injuries, the only way I see this team failing is if the OL doesn't gel, as it is the one area where I am dubious of the coaching.

[vince]

pats, igles, saints, jets, steelers, others have as much talent

the packer secondary looks like all-world

the roster does look very strong, better than last year, but preseason often glows brightly before inevitable injuries roll in.

Not one of those teams have a more talented roster than the Packers IMO. The saints defense looks like it's going to get lit up again this year. Someone in another thread said it better, but getting lit up by the Seahawks in the playoffs is not a good sign for your defense. They just can't hold the Packers jocks on that side of the ball. Same can be said about the Steelers.

Jets and Eagles - go position by position and I don't think they match up. The difference between Rodgers and Sanchez, by far the most important positon on the field, is significant.

Even the Pats roster is questionable on the defensive side of the ball in some areas.

The Falcons can't match the Packers across the board either.

When you add in Capers and McCarthy, that helps even more, but you can't take anything from the players and their execution on the field.